پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,225 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,685 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 114,958,616 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 89,631,651 |
ارزیابی ریسک سرطان‌زایی و غیر سرطان‌زایی فلزات سنگین در منابع آب زیرزمینی دشت ورامین | ||
| محیط شناسی | ||
| مقاله 1، دوره 46، شماره 3، آذر 1399، صفحه 463-479 اصل مقاله (958.7 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jes.2021.317736.1008123 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| مهناز موفقی اردستانی1؛ علیرضا پرداختی* 2 | ||
| 1مهندسی محیط زیست، دانشکده محیط زیست، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران | ||
| 2دانشکده محیط زیست دانشگاه تهران، دکتری شیمی محیط زیست | ||
| چکیده | ||
| فلزات سنگین به علت ثبات شیمیایی و قابلیت تجمع در بافت زنده از مضرترین آلاینده‌های موجود در منابع آب می‌باشند. تحقیق حاضر با هدف تعیین ریسک سرطان‌زایی و غیرسرطانزایی فلزات سنگین در منابع آب زیرزمینی دشت ورامین برای دو گروه سنی کودک و بزرگ‌سال از دو مسیر بلع و مواجهه پوستی انجام شده است نتایج حاصل از ارزیابی ریسک غیر سرطانی فلزات کادمیوم، سرب، کروم، منگنز، روی، مس و آهن نشان داد که شاخص خطر (HI) برای فلز کادمیوم بیش از سایر فلزات است مقدار آن برای گروه سنی بزرگ‌سال، 428/0 و برای گروه سنی کودک، 02/1 بوده است. بنابراین شاخص خطر فلز کادمیوم برای گروه سنی کودک بالاتر از 1 بوده که سبب بروز اثرات غیر سرطان‌زایی خواهد شد. همچنین شاخص خطر برای تمامی فلزات سنگین (HItotal) برای دو گروه سنی کودک و بزرگ‌سال به ترتیب برابر با 4/1 و 583/0 به دست آمده است که برای گروه سنی کودک بالاتر از حد آستانه است. نتایج حاصل از ارزیابی ریسک سرطانی فلز کروم نشان داد که ریسک مازاد سرطان (ELCRtotal) حاصل از مجموع ریسک ناشی از بلع و ریسک مواجهه پوستی برای این فلز برابر با 5-10×528/1 شده است که در محدوده ریسک سرطان‌زایی قابل‌قبول قرار گرفته است. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| ارزیابی ریسک؛ سرطان‌زایی؛ غیر سرطان‌زایی؛ آب زیرزمینی؛ فلزات سنگین | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Cancer and Non- Cancer Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals in Ground Gater Resources of Varamin Plain | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| mahnaz Movafaghi Ardestani1؛ Alireza Pardakhti2 | ||
| 1Department of Environmental Engineering, School of Environment, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 2Department of Environmental Engineering, School of Environment, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Introduction The development of countries and the accelerated industrialization has many advantages however they have many problems including the discharge of pollutants into water bodies. therefore the study of quantity and quality of water resources especially groundwater resources which are the main source of drinking water supply worldwide can help us to solve water resources problem. Problems of water resources pollution in Iran like other developing countries due to growth of population and the accelerated industrialization are increasing. Among water source pollutants, heavy metals cause serious environmental problems. Heavy metals are important because of their properties such as high toxicity, carcinogenicity, non-degradability and mutagenicity. The density of heavy metals is 5 times higher than water. They accumulate in living tissues and eventually enter the human food chain. Due to the bioaccumulation of heavy metals, their release into the environment, even in low concentrations, is a serious threat to plants, animals and humans. Heavy metals enter the human body through different ways, including food chain, water, skin contact, and inhalation of smoke and particles. Neurological disorders, types of cancer, respiratory disorders, cardiovascular disorders, damage to the liver, kidneys and brain, Hormone imbalance, abortion, arthritis, osteoporosis and death are the effects of entering heavy metal to the human body. Therefore, due to the toxic effects of heavy metals on the human body, risk assessment of exposure to these compounds is important. Health risk assessment is an important tool for assessing potential adverse health effects of being exposed to contaminated water. Health risk assessment consists of 4 basic steps 1) hazard identification 2) dose response assessment 3) exposure assessment 4) risk characterization The quality of surface and groundwater resources in Varamin plain is threatened due to the reduction of high quality surface water resources such as Jajrud River in the Varamin plain, using the effluent of the wastewater treatment plant in the south of Tehran to irrigate agricultural lands and population growth as a result of increasing urbanization as well as the development of agriculture and industry. In this study, cancer and non-cancer risk assessment of heavy metals, which had been measured in groundwater resources of Varamin plain before, has been performed for both age groups of children and adults. Materials and methods The concentration of heavy metals in groundwater in Varamin plain has been measured for two wet and dry seasons by Nejati Jahromi et al. Here, carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic human health risk assessment of heavy metals in groundwater for both age groups of children and adults were investigated. Equation 1 and 2 were used for non-cancer risk analysis via oral and dermal exposure respectively. Finally total non-cancer risk was calculated according to equation 3. Reference dose (RfD) value of cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb), chromium (Cr), manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn), iron (Fe) and copper (Cu) were taken 0.0005,0.0035, 0.003, 0.14, 0.3, 0.7 and 0.04 respectively as per EPA guideline. For dermal risk analysis, RfDdermal were calculated by IRIS formula (equation 4), where ABSGI for cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb), chromium (Cr), manganese (Mn), Zinc (Zn), iron (Fe) and copper (Cu) were taken 0.05, 0.15, 0.025, 0.04, 0.2, 0.2, and 0.57 respectively as per EPA guideline. Cancer and non-cancer risk were calculated by evaluating chronic daily intake (CDI) in mg/kg/days according to equation 5 and 6. Where C is the concentration of heavy metal in mg/L, IR is the daily ingestion rate in L/d, EF is exposure frequency in day/years, ED is exposure duration in year, BW is the body weight in kg, SA is exposed skin area in cm2, Kp is dermal permeability coefficient in cm/h, ET is exposure time in hour and AT is the average time in days. For cancer risk analysis via oral and dermal exposure we used equation 7 and 8 respectively. Finally total cancer risk was calculated according to equation 9. CSForal value of hexavalent chromium was taken 0.19 as per EPA guideline. For dermal risk analysis, CSFdermal were calculated by IRIS formula (equation 10). Moreover cancer cases were calculated by using equation 11. Discussion of Results Comparison of the concentrations of heavy metals, which are measured by Nejati Jahromi et al. and the standard values demonstrate that the average concentration of cadmium in both wet and dry seasons and the average concentration of lead in wet seasons are higher than the standard value . The results of the non-cancer risk assessment demonstrated that the hazard index (HI) for cadmium due to the lower RFD value of cadmium is higher than other heavy metals. According to EPA guideline if Hazard Index (HI) is more than 1,it may result in adverse effects on human health. In this investigation, the HQoral and HQdermal values of heavy metals for both age groups were less than 1. However the HI of Cadmium for children age group was found 1.024 that is higher than the threshold limit . According to EPA guideline, the cancer risk less than 10-6 and the cancer risk between 10-6 and 10-4 were classified as ‘negligible’ and ‘acceptable’ respectively whereas the cancer risk more10-4 was classified as ‘high’. In this study, the cancer risk through oral and dermal exposure of chromium were estimated to be 1.07×10-5 and 4.5×10-6 respectively that classified as ‘acceptable’ cancer risk as per EPA. The cancer cases in this area with a population of 990447 people were estimated 15 people. Conclusion Comparison of the concentration of heavy metals and standard values demonstrated that the concentration of cadmium (Cd) and lead (Pb) is higher than standard values. However the concentrations below the standard cannot guarantee the absence of risk. Therefore, risk assessment is essential. The results revealed that the cancer and non-cancer risks for oral exposure of heavy metals are higher than dermal exposure due to the lower exposure time of dermal. The results of carcinogenic risk assessment of chromium demonstrated that its cancer risk is acceptable as per EPA guideline. The results of the non-cancer risk assessment of heavy metals demonstrated that the total hazard index (HItotal) of heavy metals for children age group is higher than threshold limit, therefore it is necessary to use preventive methods to restrict the entry of these heavy metals into the groundwater source or use a suitable treatment method to remove them. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Risk assessment, Carcinogenic risk, Ground water, Heavy metals | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
شهریاری،ج؛ رضایی،م (1399). ارزیابی ریسک سرطان‌زایی و غیر سرطان‌زایی فلزات سنگین در شبکه توزیع آب شرب شهر زابل، مجله علوم پزشکی نیشابور، 8 (3)، صص 75-59. ملکوتیان،م؛ محمدی سنجدکوه،س (1393). بررسی کیفی منابع آب زیرزمینی دشت سیرجان از نظر آلودگی به فلزات سنگین در سال 1393، مجله دانشگاه علوم پزشکی تربت حیدریه (طنین سلامت) ، 2 (2) ، صص 39-31 نجاتی جهرمی،ز؛ ناصری،ح (1396). ارزیابی کیفیت منابع آب زیرزمینی آبخوان ورامین از نظر قابلیت شرب: آلودگی با فلزات سنگین، سلامت و محیط‌زیست،10 (4)، صص 559-572. Baynes, R. E., Barlow, B., Mason, S. E., & Riviere, J. E. (2010). Disposition of melamine residues in blood and milk from dairy goats exposed to an oral bolus of melamine. Food and chemical toxicology, 48(8-9), 2542-2546.
Bhaskar, C. V., Kumar, K., & Nagendrappa, G. (2010). Assessment of heavy metals in water samples of certain locations situated around Tumkur, Karnataka, India. E-Journal of chemistry, 7.
Demir, V., Dere, T., Ergin, S., Cakır, Y., & Celik, F. (2015). Determination and health risk assessment of heavy metals in drinking water of Tunceli, Turkey. Water resources, 42(4), 508-516.
Elouear, Z., Bouzid, J., Boujelben, N., Feki, M., Jamoussi, F., & Montiel, A. (2008). Heavy metal removal from aqueous solutions by activated phosphate rock. Journal of hazardous materials, 156(1-3), 412-420.
EPA, U. (2018). edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories Tables. EPA 822-F-18-001. Washington, DC: United States Environmental Protection Agency. https://www. epa. gov/sites/production/files/201803/documents/dwtable2018. pdf.
Ghaderpoori, M. (2018). Heavy metals analysis and quality assessment in drinking water–Khorramabad city, Iran. Data in brief, 16, 685.
Kamarehie, B., Jafari, A., Zarei, A., Fakhri, Y., Ghaderpoori, M., & Alinejad, A. (2019). Non-carcinogenic health risk assessment of nitrate in bottled drinking waters sold in Iranian markets: a Monte Carlo simulation. Accreditation and Quality Assurance, 24(6), 417-426.
Karbasi, M., Karbasi, E., Sarami, A., & Kharrazi, H. G. (2010). Assessment of Heavy Metals Values in Drinking Water Sources of Alashtar in 2009. Majaleh Daneshgahe Olum Pezeshki Lorestan, 12(1), 65-70.
Miranzadeh, M., Mahmoodzadeh, A., Hasanzadeh, M., & Bigdeli, M. (2011). Assessment of Heavy Metals Concentration in Water Contribution Network of Kashan in 2010. Majaleh Behdast va Salamat Ardebil, 2(3), 56-66.
Muhammad, S., & Ahmad, K. (2020). Heavy metal contamination in water and fish of the Hunza River and its tributaries in Gilgit–Baltistan: evaluation of potential risks and provenance. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 20, 101159.
Nahid, P., & MOSLEHI, M. P. (2008). Heavy metals concentrations on drinking water in different Aeras of Tehran as ppb and Methods of Remal Them.
Poonia, T., Singh, N., & Garg, M. C. (2021). Contamination of Arsenic, Chromium and Fluoride in the Indian groundwater: a review, meta-analysis and cancer risk assessment. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 1-12.
Rajaei, Q., Pourkhabbaz, A. R., & Hesari Motlagh, S. (2012). Assessment of heavy metals health risk of groundwater in Ali Abad Katoul Plian. Journal of North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences, 4(2), 155-162.
Rezaei, H., Zarei, A., Kamarehie, B., Jafari, A., Fakhri, Y., Bidarpoor, F., ... & Shalyari, N. (2019). Levels, distributions and health risk assessment of lead, cadmium and arsenic found in drinking groundwater of Dehgolan’s villages, Iran. Toxicology and environmental health sciences, 11(1), 54-62.
Sinkakarimi, M. H., Rajei, G., Mahdijezhad, M. H., & Hatamimanesh, M. (2020). Health Risk Assessment of Some Heavy Metals in Groundwater Resources of Birjand Flood Plain Using Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Model. Journal of Health, 11(2), 183-193..
Tobiason, J. E., Bazilio, A., Goodwill, J., Mai, X., & Nguyen, C. (2016). Manganese removal from drinking water sources. Current Pollution Reports, 2(3), 168-177.
Valavanidis, A., & Vlachogianni, T. (2010). Metal pollution in ecosystems. Ecotoxicology studies and risk assessment in the marine environment. Dept. of Chemistry, University of Athens University Campus Zografou, 15784.
Wuana, R. A., & Okieimen, F. E. (2011). Heavy metals in contaminated soils: a review of sources, chemistry, risks and best available strategies for remediation. Isrn Ecology, 2011.
Zhao, L., Gong, D., Zhao, W., Lin, L., Yang, W., Guo, W., ... & Li, Q. (2020). Spatial-temporal distribution characteristics and health risk assessment of heavy metals in surface water of the Three Gorges Reservoir, China. Science of The Total Environment, 704, 134883. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 944 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 696 |
||